Dial-a-Ride

Keith Prince: In your manifesto you claimed, “Dial-a-Ride and Taxicard schemes remain crucial to my transport plans given how important they are to helping older and less mobile Londoners get around the city.” Given you consider Dial-a-Ride so crucial - and whilst the extension to 10pm over the Christmas period is welcome - when will you be scrapping the curtailment of services at 8pm and extending it to 10pm on a permanent basis?

Sadiq Khan: I am incredibly proud that Dial-a-Ride continues to help older and disabled Londoners move around our city with confidence at no cost to them. Since 29November [2021], the start of the busiest period for customer trips, Dial-a-Ride services have run until 10pm. Only AssemblyMemberPrince could turn this positive story into a negative one. Services will continue to operate at these extended hours throughout the festive period until 3January [2022], allowing members to visit shops, see friends and family or visit their GP at this important time of year, as well as improving members’ ability to attend evening events hosted by clubs and other activities through the festive season as long as they are safe.
All TfL services are now operating in a context of financial constraint and, to ensure TfL can continue to provide vital services to the Londoners who need them the most, it is crucial that TfL receives a long-term sustainable funding deal from the Government. I would hope that all Members of the London Assembly, even those who support this Government blindly, would lobby the Government for a fair long-term deal rather than supporting an approach that seeks to punish Londoners, particularly older and less mobile Londoners, for doing the right thing during the pandemic. Any decision to make permanent changes to Dial-a-Ride operating hours will need to take into account TfL’s funding situation and what hours of operation TfL’s budget will allow.
I should add that service planning decisions also take into account any changes in how the service is being used. Customer demand for Dial-a-Ride services remains significantly reduced as a result of the pandemic. At present, demand stands at just over 40% of pre-COVID levels, and we are seeing different patterns of use to those seen before the pandemic. Between 8pm and 10pm - this was before Omicron - demand is currently at one third of previous levels. TfL will continue to monitor this and ensure it is able to manage any further increases.

Keith Prince: First of all, I would like to wish you a merry Christmas, in spite of the attack, and thank you very much for the lovely carol service last week.
If you think I am being negative and if standing up for my residents is being negative, then I am quite happy to be negative. I am going to forgive you, MrMayor, because you probably do not understand, and I do not mean that in a rude way, either.
I will give you an example. One of my constituents who wanted to go to the local pantomime tried to book a trip home at 9pm but was told that the latest that they could book the trip home - this is in spite of the service allegedly going on until 10pm - was 8.30pm. The reason for that is that if they were to pick the customer up at 9pm, that would be too late for the driver to get back to the yard by 10pm.
You may not be aware of this, so that is why I am going to forgive you. This 10pm deadline is for when the bus has to be back at the yard, and 9pm is not 10pm. If in reality they are saying that the latest trip that you can take is 9pm, then they should be honest about that, MrMayor.

Sadiq Khan: There are two points the Member raises, firstly that he is standing up for residents. He appears to have lost his voice when it comes to standing up for his residents in asking the Government to give TfL the support it needs as a consequence of the pandemic rather than punishing Londoners‑‑

Keith Prince: That is not true, MrMayor, because you know that I was the person who instigated the round robin that went to the Transport Minister asking for the £500million to come back to London. I instigated that, we agreed that, and then it was only me who did not get to sign it. I am not having that.

Sadiq Khan: Hold on a second. The Government has asked us to raise additional funds on top of the revenues already raised of £500million‑‑

Keith Prince: Yes, but you said I did not speak up, MrMayor. I did speak up. I supported you to get that £500million.

Sadiq Khan: You have a chance now to unequivocally criticise the Government’s approach to London, to explain how you support the Mayor and the majority of decent Members of the Assembly in objecting to the anti-London approach from the Government, and to say that the Government is wrong to punish London this way. We will look forward to you saying that during the course of this MQT.
The second point you raised is that people cannot book a service on Dial-a-Ride after 9pm. That is not true, but if it is the case that your constituent received that information, I am more than happy to look into it. If that is the advice he was given, it was wrong because it is possible to book trips up until 10pm.

Keith Prince: All right. That is what I would ask you. Would you ensure, MrMayor, that 10pm means 10pm?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. These people - and you know because you spend time with them - are lonely and they are isolated, and this is their one chance to get out and meet people.

Keith Prince: These are the least mobile people we have so we have to stand up for them, and that is what I am doing. Also, MrMayor - and please do not repeat what you have already said because I accept what you have said - can you please ensure that we do run this after Christmas and that it is up to 10pm on a permanent basis? These are the least mobile people that we have in this city, MrMayor, and we need this service up till 10pm and a proper 10pm, ongoing, not just for Christmas.

Sadiq Khan: Let me be quite clear because your residents may be watching. We cannot guarantee that Dial-a-Ride will carry on as it has in the past unless we get long-term support from the Government and so I am afraid I cannot give them that reassurance.

Keith Prince: Will you make it a priority, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: I will make a priority to get a deal from the Government and any help you can give, bearing in mind you are from the same tribe, will be appreciated.

Keith Prince: Thank you.

Tackling Increased Freight on London’s Roads

Hina Bokhari: What actions are you taking to tackle the increase of freight on London’s roads?

Sadiq Khan: The freight industry is vital to London’s economy and we are all grateful for operators’ hard work and professionalism, providing a lifeline to many during the darkest days of the pandemic. The industry in London is now safer and cleaner than ever before. Our world-leading Direct Vision standard has revolutionised HGV safety by requiring advanced cab design or other technology to improve visibility and the expanded Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) and the tightened Low Emission Zone have reduced harmful emissions.
Last Friday [10 December 2021], I published a report following the first month of the expanded ULEZ. I was pleased to see that compliance was high in the weeks before the launch and has grown in the first month, with the largest growth seen in vans where compliance increased by a further 7%. This continues a long-term trend of van compliance increasing more rapidly than other types of vehicles from a low baseline. Overall, TfL has seen a decline in goods vehicles in the capital since the start of the pandemic. This appears to have been owing to reductions in HGVs and vehicles servicing construction sites. However, there has been an increase in vans associated with an increase in internet shopping, which now makes up 30% of total retail compared to 20% before the pandemic.
TfL is working with businesses to ensure we recover from the pandemic in a sustainable way, and we are now at a critical juncture at which to influence new habits as they are being established. It is a great opportunity to work with retailers, carriers and intermediaries to put in place the foundations for a sustainable future in which the sector contributes far less to congestion and pollution, whilst continuing to support economic growth. One way TfL is doing this is by working to promote cycle freight, a zero carbon alternative to traditional freight. TfL is currently developing a cargo bike strategy, working with Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), boroughs and industry. In 2018, my Transport Strategy set out the aim of reducing freight trace in central London in the morning peak by 10% by 2026. In 2019, TfL and I published a detailed programme of measures to help the industry become more efficient and to meet the aim in our Freight and Servicing Action Plan. These range from encouraging rail and water freight and promoting mixed land use to reducing unnecessary trips to supporting sustainable ecommerce and zero emission last-mile deliveries.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you so much for your answer, MrMayor, and mentioning the work that you have been doing with TfL with businesses and cargo bikes because that is the area that I am going to be talking about a little bit more. Countries around the world are already leading the way on switching to low and zero emission vehicles for freight transport. The DPD Group in Zagreb, Croatia, is using electric cargo bikes for more parcel deliveries and there are plenty of other European cities that have put in place dedicated spaces for larger cycles, including cargo bikes. As Mayor of London, you could do more to encourage businesses to move to more environmentally friendly modes of freight delivery and futureproof our infrastructure to account for the changes in relation to deliveries across London. Building on the works of Better Bankside, will you commit to working with business improvement districts to pilot a cargo bike hub to support local and last-mile deliveries?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question, for your interest in this and for raising this at People’s Question Time as well. It was really receptive in the room, what you were talking about, which is really good. I completely agree with you about the interest of pushing this further. There are some really good examples that I would encourage you to visit, in particular Hackney is doing some really exciting work in relation to cargo bikes. Lambeth and Waltham Forest are really good examples, and you will spot - and I referred to this in my original answer to your question - about the role of BIDs. Businesses need to understand the importance of this area and we are working closely with them. You will be pleased to know that we hope to have a strategy published next year from TfL, subject of course to us getting financial support from the Government. If we do not get the financial support from the Government we need, that will impact our ability to increase rapidly the further rollout of the cargo bikes that you have been talking about. Also, on last-mile delivery, how can that last mile be on a bike or another form of zero carbon transmission rather than a polluting van?

Hina Bokhari: Thank you for mentioning the other boroughs; Richmond [upon Thames] Council is doing great work as well. What actions will you take to scale up the support of other boroughs to invest in the cargo bike hire scheme for businesses? Can you give me a bit more detail on that? Working with Peddle My Wheels, for example, would be a great way of supplying businesses and residents with more options, maybe using a cargo bike for a monthly fee.

Sadiq Khan: I have got to be honest; all those things look very difficult with the current finances and the challenges we are facing. A lot of our projects in this area will have to be cut if we are going to meet the targets the Government has set. The Government has asked us to make cuts of £720million extra by 2024, and I have got to be honest with you, these are things we want to do, and we are committed to them. That is why the roles of the businesses are important in the boroughs and industry because they can bring in additional money that TfL has not got.

Hina Bokhari: Considering the economic difficulties that you have just mentioned, there was a van scrappage scheme for small businesses that ended in August[2021] and many small businesses were excluded from that. Will you consider maybe using the revenue being raised by ULEZ charges to help small businesses purchase cargo bikes, helping them to stay in business?

Sadiq Khan: If you were having this conversation with the Department of Transport (DfT) after they have picked themselves up off the floor after laughing at that idea, they would say “No” because the money from the scrappage scheme that we contributed was from TfL. It was £61million from TfL. The Government gave us zero money, although it has given Bath, Birmingham and Portsmouth money. There is no more money left in the scrappage scheme. The ULEZ is not raising the sorts of monies that the DfT expects it to raise - for good reason, because Londoners are doing the right thing. 92% of vehicles are compliant and so are not paying the ULEZ charge, and the small money that is being raised by ULEZis paying for other public transport services.

Hina Bokhari: I understand. Thank you very much for your answer.

TfL Income Streams

Caroline Pidgeon: Given the state of TfL’s finances and slow engagement from Government on future funding, what other revenue raising schemes have been considered by TfL?

Sadiq Khan: In good faith, TfL has met all the conditions in the last funding agreement, one of which was to conduct a review of potential new income sources. A shortlist of options was submitted to the Government by TfL as required on 27August [2021], more than three and a half months ago. We made it clear in August that we wanted a dialogue with the Government so that we could move forward in partnership together.
The Government did not respond for over two and a half months, and only at the eleventh hour did TfL receive limited and partial feedback from the Government. I am disappointed that even now we are still waiting for the Government to engage properly on a matter that is of such critical importance to both the capital and the wider UK economy.
As I have said, the fairest way to raise new income for TfL would be for the Government to let us keep the £500million Londoners pay every year in vehicle excise duty, which is currently used almost entirely outside London. Because the Government has ruled this out, this means we have been left with no alternative but to plan to increase council tax in London by around £20 a year on average from next year and over the following two years.
At a time when inflation is at a ten-year high, the Government has already required TfL to increase fares by retail price index (RPI) plus 1% and there are some changes to fare structures and ticketing that will also have to be made to meet the Government’s demands. Subject to impact assessment and consultation, these changes are likely to include applying an all-day peak fare for Tube journeys to Heathrow on the Piccadilly line; increasing the Oyster card deposit from £5 to £7; withdrawing from the Travelcard agreement; making permanent a 9am start for the 60-plus photocard and the older person’s Freedom Pass; and slowly increasing the age of eligibility for free travel using the 60-plus pass. Everyone who has this card currently would keep it and everyone who is due to get it in the next few years will still get one, but just a bit later than they had perhaps expected. I am also asking TfL to look into whether we could retain the eligibility age of 60 for the poorest Londoners.
Even with the additional revenue we are being forced to raise, TfL will still have to make significant cuts to bus and Tube services, planning on the basis of managed decline.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you very much for your answer. It is an absolutely bleak assessment of TfL’s finances. I will not be able to get into the detail of your answer but, my goodness, there are some horrors in there. Urgent action and progressive thinking are going to be needed for long-term sustainable funding.
At present, you have numerous different road charges in London, the boundaries and charges for which are somewhat crude. Do you think that now is probably the perfect opportunity to seriously consider the benefits of introducing a smart road pricing system in London?

Sadiq Khan: The soonest we could bring in revenues, assuming all the other hurdles were overcome in relation to the technology, the scale, the cost and so forth, would be around 2025/26. The Government is requiring us to bring in £500million from 2023. If you are able to persuade the Government to delay the demand for another three years, we can have a conversation, but I am afraid the Government’s demands are for now rather than some time down the road.

Caroline Pidgeon: I am thinking longer term because, clearly, this is not going to go away. I appreciate that it cannot happen overnight.
Nottingham introduced a Workplace Parking Levy back in 2011. They raised about £75million from that, which has been used to invest in transport networks. Only two London boroughs are currently looking at this, even though I know you have issued guidance to the boroughs on setting this up. Will you look at developing perhaps a trial Workplace Parking Levy scheme in London?

Sadiq Khan: I was the Minister who began the conversation with Nottingham about the Workplace Parking Levy and you are right that it has brought in revenues. We are looking at all options.
In relation to the car parking you referred to, a lot of this is a negotiation with London Councils about who would get the share of the revenues and stuff, so we have to be cognisant of that. You will be aware - those watching may not be – that we are responsible for only 5% of the roads in London. The other 95% are council roads. We are speaking to London Councils. They will also see a massive reduction in the tax increment financing money they receive if we do not get more support from the Government. Everyone has skin in the game.

Caroline Pidgeon: Exactly and it does affect the boroughs, too. Finally, the expansion of the ULEZ appears to have been a great success, but I wonder whether you might consider taking it further. Such an expansion could be a really good opportunity to both generate revenue and tackle emissions. What consideration have you given to further expanding the ULEZ to cover the whole of London, and could you send me any work that has been done on this to date?

Sadiq Khan: You will be aware that we brought forward the ULEZ expansion in October [2021]. The Government was against that, and now the Government is saying that could be one of the methods used to raise additional revenues. Because Londoners have done the right thing and 92% are compliant within the ULEZ and 82% are compliant outside the ULEZ, the Government is complaining it is not bringing in the revenues it was hoping it would bring in. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t.

Caroline Pidgeon: It is delivering what it should. I know.

Sadiq Khan: I am more than happy, AssemblyMemberPidgeon, for TfL to share with you any work it has done, subject to privacy issues and stuff, because it is important for you to be aware. By the way, by Londoners doing the right thing and being compliant, it is improving the air quality, which is saving the NHS money and is increasing productivity. Rather than the Government seeing the bigger picture, its crude assessment is the revenues being brought in are not what they had hoped.

BikeSafe

Keith Prince: Please can you provide an update on the Metropolitan Police BikeSafe scheme?

Sadiq Khan: BikeSafe is a national police-led motorcycle safety scheme with 36 participating forces, including the MPS. The aim of the scheme is to work with motorcycle riders to provide workshops on safety and hazard awareness. The workshops are classroom-based sessions where officers discuss the areas of danger relevant to motorcyclists and work through how to keep the riders safer. From there, the riders are taken on observed rides in urban and rural settings so that an experienced police motorcyclist can give them feedback on their riding.
The purpose of the BikeSafe programme is to reduce casualties amongst motorcyclists, as it is recognised that they are one of the most vulnerable road user groups. According to TfL data, motorcyclists account for only 2% of road users in London, but they are disproportionately represented in the numbers of those killed and seriously injured on London’s roads.
BikeSafe is delivered by the MPS Motorcycle Safety Team, which is part of the Roads and Transport Policing Command (RTPC). The team is entirely funded by TfL as part of its contract with the MPS. It consists of one sergeant and six constables who, when they are not delivering BikeSafe workshops, proactively patrol recognised casualty hotspots. They also provide specialist motorcycle support with crime-related matters to other units within the RTPC and wider MPS.
The London workshops are currently run from eight venues across the capital to ensure even coverage across the city. The MPS provides around 50% of the total workshops nationwide and it is the only force that offers the course to provisional licence holders. The Motorcycle Safety Team delivered courses to around 600 people in 2021, covering a mix of riders including couriers, people engaged in the gig economy, commuters, and those who use their motorcycles for social riding. The team has led the way on a project to deliver a bespoke workshop for couriers. I am pleased that the MPS is doing so much good work to support motorcycle safety.

Keith Prince: Thank you, MrMayor. It is a good scheme. Do you think you could do more, though, to promote this more widely? There are a lot of especially provisional motorcyclists - or [riders of] powered two-wheelers - who are not aware of these courses. It will be very helpful if you could promote them more widely, and also if perhaps the Deputy Mayor [for Transport] could engage with some of the larger delivery companies to make them aware, so that their delivery staff could engage in and benefit from these courses.

Sadiq Khan: I am more than happy to take offline any ideas the Member has. He is a keen motorcyclist, and he knows, when you see 2% of users being 25% of those killed or seriously injured, there must be more we can do. I am more than happy to listen to any ideas you have because we have to be doing much more. This course is available. There is a waiting list but let us get more people being aware of this and doing it.

Keith Prince: OK. Finally, would you redouble your efforts, please, to try to persuade boroughs to let motorcyclists use the bus lanes they run?

Sadiq Khan: I am afraid the season of goodwill may have just ended at that moment because you will be aware of the concerns around not just congestion, but also emissions caused by motorcycles. We can, again, talk about this offline.

Keith Prince: Sorry, MrMayor, you cannot accuse motorcyclists of causing congestion.

Sadiq Khan: I am more than happy to explain to you the braking distance rules that apply to motorcycles and the distance between vehicle A and vehicle B compared and contrasted with, for example, walking and cycling.

Keith Prince: I would love to have that conversation with you, MrMayor.

Housing Delivery

Sem Moema: Can you update us on the delivery of new housing and how this is helping to address the shortage of homes in London this winter?

Sadiq Khan: In 2019 and 2020, we started more than 17,000 low-cost homes to rent and buy through our Affordable Homes Programme, and more council homes were started across the capital in that year than in any year since 1993. This year, we have beaten that record with the most council homes begun in any year since the 1970s. Yesterday I was in Southwark with [Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development] TomCopley, visiting good examples of council homes being built in our great city.
The housing shortage hits Londoners on low incomes hardest, so our new Affordable Homes Programme focuses on building the social rented homes they need. More than half of those social rental homes will be delivered by councils. Since I was elected in 2016, the proportion of affordable homes in developments referred to the Mayor for approval has almost doubled from 22% under the old, dodgy definition to 40% under the more stringent ‘affordable homes’ definition.
To deliver action now, we are also working with boroughs to tackle the worst effects of the housing shortage, including helping those sleeping rough or living in temporary accommodation. This includes my Right to Buy-back Fund, which is supporting boroughs to buy back former council homes that can be then used to house homeless families.
We also need the Government to step up and give us the funding to build at a scale that matches London’s needs for new affordable homes. The Government must also ensure that we get the necessary investment in our infrastructure. For example, support for the extension of the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) towards Beckton Riverside and Thamesmead would unlock 30,000 new homes. Failure to agree a long-term funding settlement for TfL puts important transport projects at risk and makes it harder to deliver the new homes we desperately need.

Sem Moema: Thank you, MayorKhan. Let me be that annoying person to say I am really pleased to hear that you have met a deadline that started before I was born. Congratulations. That that record is really amazing to hear.

Sadiq Khan: As the recipient of that, it is really annoying.

Sem Moema: That is intended. My question was really to understand the challenges that the sector faces this year or through the winter, rather. You have talked about the record of delivery, which is really good. Savills talks about the proportion of submarket homes - its terminology - and the number of homes that have been delivered, 7,900 since 2015/16, and then there is that need, which we are working much faster to meet. The Right to Buy-back is a big part of that as well as - something close to my heart - supporting Afghan refugees.
I just wonder how we are going to overcome, however, some of those challenges that are already bubbling up with inflation and building costs being affected and how we are going to prepare for the coming months to make sure that we can continue to deliver and meet that target.

Sadiq Khan: I chaired the Homes for Londoners Board this week, and you are spot on about the prevailing winds that are affecting construction. We have a labour shortage exacerbated by Brexit; we have a supplies shortage; we have construction inflation way above normal inflation, which, as it is, is at a ten-year high; we have those who are already responsible for housing worried about the remediation required that has been brought to light by [the] Grenfell [Tower fire] and so forth. It is a big challenge that we have, and we cannot pretend it is not going to be challenging. That is why breaking the record last year is so impressive in that context. It is going to be tough.
Linked to that, we have the eviction ban been lifted, which means we will have more people potentially being made homeless. We are already seeing rough sleeping going up, particularly for young people. We are the capital city. People, not unreasonably, come to the capital city when it comes to leaving their villages, towns and cities across the country. We had a delay with the Renters’ Reform Bill as well. The Section 21 changes we were lobbying for have been delayed. At the same time, private rents are going up as well. It is really hard. It is really difficult.
We continue to work with the Government. I had a very good meeting with [the Rt Hon] MichaelGove
[MP, Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities]. I was impressed by his willingness to listen. He appeared to understand the challenges we have faced. I also understand he has been addressing some of the concerns raised by the Grenfell community in relation to their concerns about some of the policies announced by [the Rt Hon] RobertJenrick [MP, former Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government]. There are also the issues around, for example, the External Wall System 1 (EWS1) scheme and so forth. There are so many problems and we are hoping that MichaelGove as the new Secretary of State works with us, the industry, leaseholders, residents, renters and so forth to try to improve what is still a crisis.

Sem Moema: Thank you. I also wanted to ask you about the potential impact of the lack of a funding deal on some of the amazing schemes and additional homes that we really desperately need across the capital. Both housing and transport are intricately linked, and we do not want people to be having to factor in from the very beginning of a new development that it will be car-led. It is absolutely essential that new homes, where possible, are close to transport hubs. We have had conversations here about whether it is appropriate or not to build on carparks at stations. It seems the ideal place to deliver affordable homes. There is zero commute.
What does that mean for unlocking new homes across the capital and, more importantly, into those outer London zones as well?

Sadiq Khan: This is so important. The only time that ‘I’ comes before ‘H’ is when we are talking about infrastructure before housing. We have to have infrastructure there to support the housing. The Secretary of State came along for the opening of the Northern line extension, paid for by Londoners, by the way. That extension on the Northern line - two stations, Nine Elms and Battersea Power Station - has led to more than 25,000 homes and tens of thousands of jobs. Hold on a second. What about the potential homes we could build in Beckton, in Greenwich - 30,000 homes - that will be sacrificed, or the 600 homes in Colindale in Barnet that will be sacrificed, or the tens of thousands of homes that would be sacrificed if the Bakerloo line extension south were to take place? That is why it is nonsensical for the Government to say it wants to address the housing crisis but not give TfL the funding we need. That is why it is so important for the Government to work with us in a partnership to try to resolve this and to make sure that we can both make sure public transport helps our businesses flourish and thrive, and also helps unlock the housing that is so important for a capital city like London.

Sem Moema: OK. Thank you.

Disproportionate Impacts of Crime

Susan Hall: What actions are you taking to reduce crime within communities who are disproportionately impacted by crime?

Sadiq Khan: I know that crime can disproportionately affect different communities and demographics. Last week, I published a report on the driving factors behind young people becoming involved in or being a victim of violence. We know, for example, that Black Londoners are disproportionately represented as victims and offenders for all categories of serious violence. Some 62% of homicide victims and 65% of offenders are Black Londoners.
However, unlike some, I do not believe that it is skin colour that determines your chances of being a victim or an offender, but the disproportionate rates of poverty, unemployment and school exclusion affecting London’s Black communities. Working with the Violence Reduction Unit (VRU), England’s first, City Hall is implementing a wide range of programmes to support young Londoners who are disproportionately affected by violence, from help with housing and poverty to education and workplace issues. The Young Londoners Fund has already provided positive opportunities to over 100,000 young people in our city, whilst Sport Unites is using the power of sport to improve lives. Our Workforce Integration Network programme is supporting young Black men into Living Wage employment in London. Last week I announced that next year, over the course of just 12 months, we will be stepping up our work with a package of measures that will support nearly 100,000 more young Londoners.
We also know that women are overwhelmingly affected by domestic abuse and sexual violence. We know that the majority of crimes against women are committed by men, and that is why my refreshed
Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy will take a public health approach, focusing on the complex underlying causes of these offences, alongside tackling perpetrators and ensuring that victims have the support they need. We have invested a record £60.7million to tackle violence against women and girls. £44million of this money has been invested in specialist services for victims of sexual violence and domestic abuse and supporting women affected by harmful practices like female genital mutilation and in programmes to address the behaviour of perpetrators of abuse.
We also know that religious communities are sometimes the victims of hate crime. I am supporting grassroots organisations through the Shared Endeavour Fund to further deliver on our commitment to tackle racism, hatred, intolerance and extremism. In the last year, this programme has funded over 30 organisations including several projects that specifically focus on countering antisemitism.
The changing nature of crime makes it vital that we remain vigilant. That is why the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) monitors policing crime and confidence data year-round and, while we always want to speak to Londoners and hear their experiences, this evidence-led approach is at the heart of all our work on policing and crime and will continue to be so as we move into a new Police and Crime Plan period.

Susan Hall: OK. I would like to start by saying I do not like you coming out with comments like you do regarding the colour of people’s skin. It is a totally unnecessary and outrageous comment.
I will go back to the last Plenary meeting. Were you shocked at the figures that the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] was giving you? You and I were quoting different figures and she gave us the real figures; she was saying that 97% of victims of homicide under 25 are young men or boys and 72% are Black. She also said someone is 12.2 times more likely to be a victim if they are a young Black man than a young white man. Were you shocked by those terrible figures?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am unclear which comments of mine the Member does not find‑‑

Susan Hall: Read back through what you said because you are reading all the answers, as you always do. It would be nice to actually hear what you thought sometimes.

Sadiq Khan: What I said was‑‑

Susan Hall: Just answer the question I am asking. Were you shocked by those terrible figures?

Sadiq Khan: I stand by my comments in my answer, “However, unlike some, I do not believe that it is skin colour that determines your chances of being a victim or an offender”. Does the Assembly Member disagree?

Susan Hall: We need to push the problems within the Black community. We need to help, and if we do not actually spell things out ‑‑ I will ask again. Were you shocked by those figures? I was shocked and saddened myself. Were you?

Sadiq Khan: I am astonished you were not aware of these figures. I know these figures because I examine them regularly and I meet the bereaved families. I meet them on a regular basis. It was not a shock to me at all.

Susan Hall: It must have been because you gave the wrong figures at the beginning and the Commissioner actually said, “You both have it wrong”. Both you and I gave much lower figures than was the fact, which is why I am asking you the simple question. Were you shocked by those terrible figures?

Sadiq Khan: I will answer, again, two things. Firstly, however, unlike some, I do not think skin colour is the reason why that happens but, secondly, I have been quite clear in my answer what the figures are in relation to both offenders and victims of homicide. Also, I am sure the Assembly Member will agree on the disproportionate nature of those living in poor housing, in poverty, suffering school exclusions, unemployment and so forth. Is she shocked by those figures?

Susan Hall: I am shocked by the figures, and I am asking you what we can be doing about it. You have given me an answer that went right around the houses, as usual.

Sadiq Khan: The first thing we can do is accept that there is structural racism and systemic racism in our society, made worse by the policies of this Government in the last 11 years. Does she agree with that?

Susan Hall: No. You blame the Government, MrMayor, for everything. You have an £18billion budget and we are here to ask you what you are going to do about various things. What are you going to do to help mothers to stop their sons being involved in crime or becoming victims? We have to help this community.

Sadiq Khan: Can I be clear, Chair? Does she mean Black mothers?

Susan Hall: Yes, Black mothers who are losing their kids. People do not speak out about this for exactly the reason you are proving; because you will throw back “racism” as quickly as you can. This is not about racism. We have to help the Black community. Most of the Black community would love us to try to find ways of helping their kids.

Sadiq Khan: Do you know what the Black community would like? The Black community would like this Government to challenge and take on the deep-rooted inequalities that exist in our society. Black Londoners are suffering ingrained social and economic issues. Black Londoners are suffering poverty, suffering inequality, suffering high unemployment, suffering from school exclusions and suffering from poor mental health. The conditions of those Black Londoners suffering those poor conditions have been made worse over the last 11 years.
From City Hall, with our limited budgets over the last five years, we have been tackling the complex causes of crime, and those include taking on issues around poor housing and taking on issues around poverty. What the Member does not seem to understand is, with unemployment increasing in parts of London, it is directly linked with those parts of London with the highest serious youth violence and youth unemployment. Five out of ten of the boroughs with the highest youth‑‑

Susan Hall: MrMayor, just answer the questions. Do not go off at a different‑‑

Sadiq Khan: Chair, are you going to allow me to answer the question?

Susan Hall: You do not do it for your own Members. Just answer the question.

Sadiq Khan: At some stage‑‑

Andrew Boff: Assembly MemberHall, please allow the Mayor to answer the question.

Sadiq Khan: Hallelujah. Praise the Lord. Five out of ten boroughs with the highest youth unemployment also have the highest serious youth violence. Youth unemployment, going on from unemployment generally, is also linked with issues of violence. The top ten boroughs with the highest child poverty have the highest amounts of violence as well. When we look at the violent crime increases, they are all taking place in those boroughs with the highest poverty. We are doing both suppressing violence with additional policing in those communities and also, at the same time, taking on and tackling the root causes of some of this violence, which is why we are investing more monies into helping young people and giving them constructive alternatives, whether it is culture, whether it is education, whether it is support, whether it is mentorship, but also at the same time making sure those Black men have decent
Living Wage jobs because they have suffered over the last 11 years with the consequences of austerity.

Susan Hall: Clearly, it is not working, then, is it?

Sadiq Khan: Let us deal with whether it is working.

Susan Hall: It is not working, because the‑‑

Sadiq Khan: We have seen youth‑‑

Susan Hall: No, just let me finish. It is clearly not working, because the Commissioner gave us those shocking figures. Instead of trying to blame the Government for everything, instead of going around the houses with your answers, why do we not all try our very best to help this particular community? None of us should be afraid of talking about it. We should be talking about how we can help this community. My time is up because all you do is go round the houses and blame everybody else. Remember you do have an £18billion budget, MrMayor.

Sadiq Khan: I am assuming, Chair, you are going to rule that that speech was allowed and not a question, and I cannot answer.

Universal Basic Income

Zack Polanski: What plans do you have for exploring the possibility of a universal basic income in London?

Sadiq Khan: During the pandemic, we have seen that innovative approaches to protecting people’s incomes can have a positive effect when there is a commitment from the Government to take pioneering action. We have also seen that decisive action through the existing welfare benefit system such as the £20 uplift to Universal Credit has been effective in protecting living standards.
I have always said that as we emerge from the pandemic, we should remain open-minded to a range of options for supporting Londoners in financial hardship. To this end, I commissioned research to better understand what effect different policy choices could have on levels of poverty in London and different groups’ levels of household income. That research showed that retaining the £20 a week uplift to Universal Credit and removing the benefit cap would take 70,000 children in London out of poverty immediately.
It also considered the effect that one form of a universal basic income (UBI) might have implemented in London. It showed a potential positive impact on poverty levels, but at a substantial cost to the taxpayer. It is important to also consider the risk that would be inherent in moving all existing claimants onto a new system, particularly those in the most vulnerable circumstances. We saw the huge disruption caused by the introduction of Universal Credit.
Further work is needed to fully understand how new systems might compare to existing systems in providing support to the households that most need it, and we should be cautious about pushing for the abolition of a welfare system that has shown that it can, when properly funded, be effective. I am aware of a number of UBI pilots already underway across the UK and Europe and I will consider their findings. I will also share the findings of the research I have commissioned with Ministers for their consideration.
The Government can easily act now within existing structures to drive down poverty and protect living standards. I am very concerned that many Londoners are facing the perfect storm of support being removed while the cost of living rises, especially as we enter the coldest months of the year. The Government should remove the benefit cap and reinstate the £20 a week increase to Universal Credit. The increase must also apply to Londoners who receive legacy benefits, who have never had their benefits uplifted, many of whom are single parents or disabled.

Zack Polanski: Thank you, MrMayor. Can I associate with all your comments about what the Government can and must do around protecting people, particularly those living in poverty? Your own research showed that with a UBI we could lift over 100,000 Londoners out of poverty, so surely this is something that we really want to investigate and make happen.
I had a meeting recently with GuyStanding, who I am sure you know is an economist and one of the leading experts on the UBI. I talked to him about a plan I had for two tower blocks in London in two different boroughs where we could give every single member of that community a basic income for 18 months and measure the impacts, not just financially but also for their physical wellbeing and their mental wellbeing. This can actually cut across a lot of things. You can save money in policing, education and tackling the climate emergency. Is the question not more how can we afford not to do this, and would you consider having such a pilot in London?

Sadiq Khan: The problem with any pilot in London is we need the money to do so, and that is one of the reasons why we are sharing our research with the Government. I am more than happy for London to be used as a pilot in relation to the exploration of a UBI. You will be aware of the work done in Wales, I am sure, in relation to the schemes they had in place, and you will also be aware of some of the good work around universal basic services. I am all for innovation. One of the things you will know is that we will need support from the Government to do any of this stuff. I am more than happy to get my officers to speak with you about the work we are doing. I am hoping the research unlocks some of these conversations in the Government because we should be open-minded. You will be aware of the work in Finland as well. I am more than happy to speak to you about what we can do, but the obstacle is going to be getting support from the Government.

Zack Polanski: I really appreciate that, MrMayor. Guy, who I was speaking about, has been advising [the Rt Hon] Mark Drakeford [MS, First Minister of Wales] for that Welsh pilot with the Labour Government there.
In 2017, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) suspended its current system to allow a UBI pilot in a city in the UK, so we know that this can happen. Are you doing any work to engage with it or lobby for it to make a shift so that you can do a UBI in London?

Sadiq Khan: To be fair, this work began in 2010 when [the Rt Hon Sir] IainDuncanSmith [MP] was first made the Secretary of State. It took seven years to get to 2017.
I am not saying never, just because there are challenges and obstacles. What I am saying is we have to be cognisant of the consequences of going to such a system. The point I was making in my answer was we have shown that targeted support - Universal Credit and the £20 uplift being a good example now - can lead to really good results that are cheaper than a UBI.
I am not saying no to a UBI. What I am saying is that actually there are things we can be doing now, and you have agreed with that, which I really appreciate. We can do work on this. We are happy to. What I do not want to have, though, is officers with limited bandwidth spending lots of time doing work that will be rejected by the Government. That is my big concern. I have to be pragmatic.

Zack Polanski: Understood. With 10 seconds left, could I just ask you - I would really appreciate your meeting with your team on this - could I bring GuyStanding to that meeting so that we could have an expert in the room?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. That is a good example, by the way, of often ideas from the Green Party being well received by us and not least a good example of cross-party working that we should be doing in the interests of our city.

Boundary Charge

Peter Fortune: Are you still considering introducing a boundary charge for drivers entering Greater London?

Sadiq Khan: COVID-19 has had a huge impact on TfL. At the height of the pandemic, passenger numbers collapsed by 95% as Londoners did the right thing and followed the Government’s advice to stay at home. This inevitably had a catastrophic impact on TfL’s finances, and during the worst period TfL was losing £100million per week. My clear aim remains to secure a sustainable long-term funding agreement with the Government. This will support London’s economic recovery and help achieve the Government’s own aims of a national infrastructure-led recovery, a decarbonised United Kingdom (UK) and the levelling up of our economy. I call on the Government to allow London to keep the £500million raised annually in London from vehicle excise duty. It is not fair that the Government spends this huge sum almost exclusively outside the capital, with TfL left to fund maintenance of major roads from its fares income. Unfortunately, the Government has so far ruled this out.
In the absence of agreement from the Government on this clear and fair solution to some of TfL’s funding challenges, I have had to ask TfL to look at other options. I asked TfL to undertake a feasibility study into a potential Greater London boundary charge for non-residents, noting that an increasing number of cars are being driven into London each day from outside London. A scheme of this nature could raise in the region of £500million per year, and all funds raised above the cost of implementing and operating the scheme would be invested in the transport network. The feasibility study will include an assessment of the effects of such a charge on traffic, environment, health, equality and the economy. I have not yet seen the feasibility study. Once I have, I will be keen to discuss its findings with the Government before it is published. If any proposals of this significance were to be developed further, they will be subject to the usual decision-making process including a full public consultation.
Even if we were able to agree a way forward on revenue, the scale of the financial crisis TfL is facing means that we will still need Government support on capital funding. This is money, for example, to replace ageing trains on lines like the Bakerloo, which already has some of the oldest trains in use in the country, to upgrade signalling and to electrify our buses as a key part of tackling the climate emergency.

Peter Fortune: Thank you very much for your answer, MrMayor. You said that there was a potential to raise about £500million a year from that proposed boundary charge?

Sadiq Khan: That is in the absence of the feasibility study. The feasibility study may come back and say that is nonsense.

Peter Fortune: OK. Thanks very much for that clarity. This is a real issue for a lot of people who are living in the outer regions of the capital just because the transport infrastructure system is different. In Bexley and Bromley, which I represent, we do not have Tube lines. There is a lot of dependence on buses. Of course, we have those porous borders where people travel outside of the borough to work, see friends, run businesses, run charities, etc. That is why it is such an important issue for us to get clarity on.
What you are saying from the answer is that that suggestion or that possibility of that Greater London charge is still on the table in negotiations. Is that correct?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. In summary, that is one of the options. We sent an options paper to the Government back in August [2021] because the Government asked us to set out the options for raising £500million. That was one of the options there. There is a piece of feasibility work taking place in regard to that particular option; that has not come back yet. That will come back in January [2022]. We will share that with the Government. At the moment, it is still on the table.

Peter Fortune: Thanks for that. I can only really stress the concern that this is causing to some people in Bexley and Bromley. I had one of our local BID managers contact me recently, actually, to say that they were losing some businesses from empty units simply because they were worried about factoring in that cost.
The feasibility study has been worked on for a while. You wrote to me back in June [2021] to say it was nearly ready. You said it would be ready by the end of the year, so we are getting a bit tight for time on that. When do you estimate we will be able to have a look at what that feasibility study has thrown up?

Sadiq Khan: I am told in the new year. You will appreciate TfL have had so much bandwidth in relation to the work they have been doing and stuff, but I have not seen it yet. Put it that way.

Peter Fortune: That feasibility study on whether or not that this would be something that could be used to negotiate, you have not seen it and the Commissioner [of TfL] has not seen it, either. Is that right?

Sadiq Khan: No, he would have shared it with me.

Peter Fortune: OK. Everybody is looking for the best deal that TfL can get and for all Londoners, but I just want to stress again - and it is my responsibility as the Member for Bexley and Bromley - that this would be really impactful on businesses, on families and on charities. If we could see that report as soon as possible, it is a matter of genuine concern to lots of people in southeast London, and I know elsewhere.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I fully understand the points raised in a straight manner by the Member. I take those on board, and I promise to keep him updated once I know the position, but I understand the concerns he said.

True cost of the Silvertown Road Tunnel

Siân Berry: What is the true cost of cancelling the Silvertown Road Tunnel?

Sadiq Khan: The costs of cancelling the Silvertown Tunnel are not fixed and are commercially sensitive as they would have to be negotiated with Riverlinx should a termination be discussed, or decided by the courts by way of compensation payable for breach of contract. In line with standard commercial practice, the Silvertown Tunnel project agreement provides for compensation of costs incurred and loss of expected profits less payments received. In general terms, as this is a design, build, finance and maintain agreement, there would be costs associated with cancellation of the loans put in place by the winning consortium to finance the construction in line with normal practice for this sort of agreement.
I know there has been a lot of misinformation on this from some Members of the Assembly, so it is important to be clear. Cancellation would not save Transport for London (TfL) any money or allow it to reallocate any funds. Cancellation would, in fact, incur significant costs to TfL, placing additional pressure on TfL’s finances at what is already an extremely difficult time. The Silvertown Tunnel will bring widespread benefits to London, particularly to east London, and is much cheaper than cancellation. The Blackwall Tunnel, which is the only current alternative, was not designed to cope with today’s traffic levels as a Victorian tunnel, built for horses and carriages. It has to be closed on average around 700 times a year and, if it closes even for six minutes, the queue quickly extends to three miles.
By finally addressing this longstanding issue, the new tunnel will massively reduce congestion in the area, which has a negative impact on air quality and productivity, as well as support economic growth in East London. The project will enable a step change in cross-river bus connectivity in that part of the city, resulting in the proportion of trips by public transport on the Blackwall-Silvertown corridor increasing from 10% today to 30% once the new tunnel is in operation, a threefold increase in public transport with a Silvertown Tunnel. In fact, one of the most unreliable buses in London is the single decker 108, which has to rely on the Blackwall Tunnel to get from one side of the river to the other. All of this will improve air quality in areas that currently some of the worst air quality in London owing to frequent, lengthy queuing at the Blackwall Tunnel. Baseline air quality monitoring commenced in December2020, and TfL is developing a comprehensive monitoring programme to ensure the effects of the Silvertown Tunnel scheme are fully understood.

Siân Berry: Thank you very much, MrMayor. Now the good news is, I do not want to argue with you today about the case for cancellation of the Silvertown Tunnel. I want to really focus on the question of the cost of cancellation today, and the reason I am asking is a democratic one. The Assembly has the power to amend your Budget early in 2022 and in previous years - in fact, back to 2011, because the scheme was originally put forward by [former] Mayor BorisJohnson - the Green Group on the Assembly has put forward amendments that do cancel the Silvertown Tunnel. We have made savings by doing that before, removing TfL’s development costs each time.
Since you have signed the contract to build it, we have not been able to do this because, as you point out, the cost of cancellation is now what we have to put into the new Budget and that cost is being kept secret. I do believe you have a duty to be transparent with the Assembly about this so that we can consider it in the Budget process, including how we might find funding for it and other financial considerations such as the amount of money we would save Londoners on tolling fees. Again I ask, can we have a useable estimate from you that we can use in our work on the Budget? Will you write to me with that estimate?

Sadiq Khan: I do not need to. You can just go to the [Greater London Authority (GLA)] Oversight Committee. This information has been shared with the GLA Oversight Committee and it has been reviewed by TfL’s auditors, Ernst & Young.

Siân Berry: MrMayor, with respect, I have the auditor’s report here, and these are the pages that outline the cost of cancellation. They are entirely redacted.

Sadiq Khan: TfL has shared the full details it is able to. Some aspects of this are public, and the contract is available on the website. This explains the general concept of how such costs would be calculated. As I have said, the costs are not fixed and, as I have explained, TfL’s estimates are commercially sensitive and cannot be made public. If you think about it logically, you must be able to appreciate why. The idea that you would make public the consequences of a breach of contract, which is what has been suggested by the amendment from the Greens, is clearly nonsensical. Who would do that?

Siân Berry: You described before how it needs to be negotiated, and I have actually put together a number. We have agreed to give around £2.5billion in tolling fees to the Riverlinx contractor and we know that the construction costs are about £1billion. We are also taking on about £200million worth of costs that are in our own budgets for additional construction. You can assume the remaining £1.5billion - that is a mixture of things like financing costs for the contractors but also profits - and you can come up with an estimate. Even if we gave them most of the profits back as part of the negotiations, you might come up with a figure of something like £350million. If I put that number to you, would you agree that we could use that in a Budget estimate?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I have got to say this in a way that does not appear patronising, but the naivety of the Chair of TfL saying publicly a figure that TfL would be liable to in a claim for breach of contract--

Siân Berry: I am asking for an estimate today, MrMayor, not a figure.

Sadiq Khan: Well, I am not giving you an estimate because I have got a fiduciary duty. I would hope that as a Member of the Assembly you would understand the consequences of making public what the liabilities potentially could be for a breach of contract. Also, the idea of negotiating in public through Mayor’s Question Time (MQT) on what could be liable to a private company just demonstrates why, with respect, Londoners were right to reject you twice when you stood to be Mayor.

Siân Berry: I have no further questions, but it is very disappointing that we are being denied the opportunity to do this democratic thing that we are entitled to do every year. Thank you.

Sadiq Khan: Again, Chair, there is no question, but as you are being so impartial, I suppose I will not get a chance to respond.

Surface Water Flooding

Anne Clarke: Roundtables organised by your Deputy Mayors for Fire, Resilience and Emergency Planning and Environment were set up to identify solutions to improve London’s resilience and to examine the short-term operational improvements that partners with flooding responsibilities can implement to improve London’s incident preparedness and response. What have been the outcomes of these meetings and how can London prepare to avoid surface water flooding or other extreme weather threats this winter?

Sadiq Khan: Can I thank you for your continued interest in this matter? It is really important, I know, for your constituents and for many others across our great city.
London cannot eliminate surface water flooding entirely, but we can plan and prepare to reduce the impact. Our Environment Strategy, London Plan policies and climate resilience programmes are already making a difference. I set up, as you said, a roundtable immediately after the July [2021] flooding. It has met a further three times and identified actions to improve partner response to future incidents. The meetings led to the London Resilience Partnership conducting an expedited review of the response to the flooding incidents, setting out 30 recommendations. A task and finish group, chaired by London Councils and the Environment Agency and including organisations with their responsibilities for flooding, was established to make recommendations on our city’s longer-term resilience to surface water flooding. It will report early next year [2022].
Roundtable members have already streamlined public flood communications and ensured Londoners can reach a single point of contact for assistance if flooded. They have improved the resilience partnership response through improving communications and sharing data. Last month, I ran the fourth London Flood Awareness week alongside the Environment Agency’s Flood Action Week, focusing specifically on surface water. I have contributed over £20million since 2016 to help London adapt to climate change, but we need more investment from the Government to keep pace with climate change. The task and finish group is examining how long-term strategic planning in London can help us adapt our homes, communities and city to the risk of flash flooding. We need new, improved data and evidence on how to manage the risk and communicate with the public about flood risk.
I will publish a progress report in the new year on how the relevant groups are working to improve London’s resilience to surface water flooding both in the short and longer term.

Anne Clarke: Thank you, MrMayor, and thank you for all your work on this. Just quickly, is the GLA participating in the Thames Water independent review of the sewer network to see if any issues with its operations contributed to the July2021 flooding that we saw in my constituency and across London to ensure that similar issues do not arise this winter?

Sadiq Khan: This is such an important issue, and I am not sure Londoners realise how important it is. We are. The good news is that Thames Water is also an integral part of our roundtable as well. Just to reassure you, there is joined-upness, as you would expect and demand from us.

Winter pressures

Unmesh Desai: What is your assessment of the winter challenges and pressures that you and Londoners are facing over the next three months?

Sadiq Khan: In the next three months, Londoners face the usual winter risks of poor weather, the need to heat their homes, and the circulation of winter illnesses like influenza (flu). These risks are now combined with the effects of COVID on family and social life, on the economy, and above all on the NHS. The combined impacts of Brexit and COVID have also led to specific measures in the economy, and food and energy prices have increased. Heavy goods vehicle (HGV) driver shortages, disruption to fuel supplies, and reports of shortages in supermarkets show that the systems that support normal life have become more fragile. The emergence of the Omicron variant and the new PlanB measures only increase this fragility. The impacts, as so often, fall first and most dramatically on the most vulnerable in our society. In the past two months, a range of economic and policy developments have converged to substantially increase the risk of greater numbers of Londoners experiencing financial hardship this winter. General inflation, the removal of the Universal Credit uplift, the end of the furlough scheme and increasing energy prices are putting many Londoners under serious financial pressure. While the Government did announce some measures in the autumn Budget designed to help low-income households meet the costs of living over the winter and beyond, it is simply not enough. These measures fail to provide support to some of the most vulnerable groups and are not enough to make up for the impacts of the Government’s other decisions.
My Deputy Mayor for Fire and Resilience, DrFionaTwycross, has convened industry leaders to examine and understand the compound effects of additional risks this winter, covering HGV driver shortages, fuel price increases, severe weather impacts, the strain on the NHS and other issues that may arise. The
London Resilience Partnership is meeting regularly to keep abreast of any emerging or existing issues.

Unmesh Desai: MrMayor, with the new Omicron wave, COVID-19 is once again the biggest pressure facing Londoners this winter and we are seeing the impact on every part of our lives in the economy, transport, health, police, fire services and housing. We have already talked about transport, but my question to you is, how is the GLA dealing with these challenges? You mentioned the role of DrFionaTwycross, but how is the GLA group as a whole dealing with these various challenges?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, that is a good question. Structures matter, because it means we can keep abreast of what is going on. Underneath the London Resilience Forum, there is a
London Systems Pressures Oversight Group, which looks at the London Ambulance Service, the
Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), the Fire Service, different parts of the NHS, TfL and rough sleepers. A lot of these are outside our control, but we need to know what is happening. The big unknown is people having to take time off because they have got Omicron. DrSahota[AM] mentioned NHS pressures on the staff but imagine if some of those have to go off because they have Omicron. It does not just affect the ability of the NHS; think of the Fire Service, its ability to help the Ambulance Service, and so forth. That is why we are keeping an eye on all of this to make sure, where we can, that shared information leads to better decision making, and then we share this with the Government as well.

Unmesh Desai: Turning to the role of the Government, how are you working with the Government to address these various challenges over the next three months, and do you believe that enough is being done to tackle the issues faced with regard to Omicron this winter? Earlier, you said “simply not enough” is being done.

Sadiq Khan: The announcement on Sunday [12 December 2021] from the
Prime Minister did catch us on the hop, and it caught all the partners in London and the NHS on the hop as well. We need to share information better. Had we known about the booster announcement in advance, we could have made sure things were in place. We are playing catch-up; we have caught up; and we are ramping up the booster jabs, but information sharing is really important. We will carry on doing so because, as has been said by DrSahota[AM], the expectation is that in January[2022] we could see big increases in the NHS in terms of inpatients and accident and emergency (A&E) departments under big pressure already. Also, there will be pressures on non-COVID urgent care as well, put aside the London Ambulance Service, put aside GP shortages. We are trying to do what we can to ameliorate the consequences of all those things conflating at the same time.

Unmesh Desai: Finally, the businesses and the trade unions have called for a reintroduction of emergency business support and the furlough scheme and reforms/increases to sick pay in the wake of PlanB measures being implemented. You will presumably support these calls?

Sadiq Khan: I mentioned that TfL has seen a 26% cut in people using the Tube and we are seeing massive cancellations in hospitality, in culture, theatres, bars, restaurants, live music and hotels. Unless there is financial support from the Government - and that includes grants, that includes 100% business rates relief, that includes a furlough scheme reintroduction and extension of the
value-added tax (VAT) relief from March [2020] - you are going to see businesses going bust and Londoners losing their jobs. That cannot be good for anybody.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you, MrMayor.

London Power

Leonie Cooper: Given the recent collapse of Bulb and so many smaller energy companies, can you provide an update on London Power?

Sadiq Khan: I launched London Power in January2020 to give Londoners access to energy that is always fair, affordable and green. London Power was set up as a partnership with an existing energy supplier as it was less risky, less costly and faster than starting from scratch. Recent events have shown that we were right to take that approach.
We have confidence in our partner Octopus Energy as a financially stable company with a prudent hedging strategy. It recently secured significant private investment and was also chosen by the
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) to take on 580,000 customers from a failed energy supplier, demonstrating its confidence in the company. Since London Power’s launch, 32 other energy suppliers have failed, including Bulb, the largest energy company to fail for nearly two decades.
While the Government’s energy price cap protects Londoners from the full effects of high prices, sadly, tens of thousands of London households are still likely to plunge into fuel poverty this winter. London Power currently has over 6,000 customers receiving great value, green energy and excellent customer service, rating 4.9 out of 5 on Trustpilot. I want even more Londoners to benefit.
However, across the industry, current fixed-term quotes for new customers are far above price-capped variable tariffs. Like most responsible companies, London Power is encouraging customers to stay with their current supplier for now. This will impact the entire market and is leading to extremely low customer switching levels this winter. Industry experts expect energy bills to increase further from next April [2022] when the price cap is revised upwards. I am encouraging all Londoners to check then if switching to London Power could save them money and I am working with boroughs to help spread this message.
The most vulnerable households will continue to need more help. That is why I have promoted the availability of financial support to vulnerable customers through my Warmer Homes Advice Service and I recently announced a £51million package to tackle fuel poverty, help Londoners stay warm through this winter and improve the energy efficiency of thousands of homes.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much. It is a difficult situation that we find ourselves in. An increase of 12% of the price cap has just happened and, as you have just said yourself, there is going to be a really difficult situation come April [2022]. I wanted to hear from you that Londoners could be assured that the strength of Octopus behind London Power means that at that point, when people who have fixed deals that are coming to an end, if they choose to switch, London Power is a good place for them to go. I know it has been really difficult, especially with Bulb because it was larger than quite a few of the others that were no longer able to continue.

Sadiq Khan: Yes, you raise a really important point. The best advice we can give is for people to do their research at the time because it could be there are other deals out there. Switching used to be hard, but it is now easier. People often do not switch. London Power has been brilliant in relation to the price guarantees, the renewables and the green energy. It is really important people check before they switch, but the advice is not to switch now. Even London Power, which is remarkably responsible, is saying, “Do not come to us now because we are not sure we can give you the good deal you want. You may have a better deal with the cap”, which is great for them to say so. When it comes to the price cap ending next spring, people should do their homework.

Léonie Cooper: Ofgem has already stated that it is expecting to see this significant rise, with the Andrew Marr Show predicting that the rise in April [2022] is going to cost the average household more than £420 a year in London because of the low take-up of the Energy Company Obligation (ECO). A lot of Londoners are in this very bad situation in leaky old houses, and it is not like we are going to knock them all down and suddenly replace them all with new ones.
With the current rise hitting Londoners hard already and with families struggling, what else can we do to ensure that Londoners, particularly the most vulnerable Londoners, are protected and secure if this further rise happens in April [2022], which seems inevitable? Could you tell us more about your Warmer Homes programme?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. Firstly, thank you for the job you have been doing publicising this to your constituents.
The three big things we can offer is the Warmer Homes programme, which helps you make your home less inefficient and more efficient with, for example, solid-wall insulation, heat pumps and solar panels. It is means-tested for obvious reasons. We want to help lower-income people living in fuel poverty. Separately, the Warmer Homes Advice Service gives people advice on what they can do in relation to energy advice, energy saving measures and other things they can do. The third thing is that London Power offers a £140 Warm Homes discount bill for eligible households.
We are doing we can with the limited resources we have, but you have talked publicly, I know, about the concerns you have about increasing energy prices affecting vulnerable people. That is one of the reasons why it is so important for the Government to give support when it can to those families receive Universal Credit, to get rid of the welfare benefit cap and so forth, which are causing real problems for these families. It is a double whammy.

Léonie Cooper: Thanks very much, MrMayor.

Domestic Violence Prosecution Time Limits

Joanne McCartney: Do you agree that the six month time limit on prosecuting many domestic violence cases should be lifted?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question and thank you for your campaigning on this issue for as long as I have been Mayor and before then, I know.
I do. We know that domestic abuse is complicated, and many people do not immediately recognise they are in or have been in an abusive relationship. We also know that in many cases, reporting the offence may not be the first thing a victim is considering when their immediate safety is at risk.
The early release of the Women’s Aid Domestic Abuse Report 2022 finds that on average abuse lasts six years before a victim finds the strength to leave an abusive situation. SafeLives reports that on average victims experience 50 incidents of abuse before getting effective help. All this underlines why the six-month time limit for prosecution is not appropriate and should be lifted.
While the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 made some welcome changes that will help tackle violence against women and girls, there is still a long way to go. There are no specific offences for domestic abuse and many domestic abuse incidents are classified as summary offences, meaning they fall within the six-month time limit for reporting. That is why I fully support the amendments initially proposed by YvetteCooperMP and then by BaronessNewlove to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill that would extend the time limit for summary offences when there is an indication of domestic abuse.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you, MrMayor. That is good to hear. Do how many cases are estimated to have been dropped in London alone because of this?

Sadiq Khan: The figure I have is for those offences described as common assault. That is a statutory offence. This is just reported between 1April2016 and 31March2021. The MPS think there were more than 850 crimes that are described as common assault where there was a marker for domestic abuse and the prosecution time limit of six months had expired.

Joanne McCartney: Of course, that is only those that were reported to the police. There will be a hidden iceberg under that. Can I ask what your office has done to lobby around this?

Sadiq Khan: As I mentioned, we fully support the campaign in Parliament, as the Domestic Abuse Act did not address this, for the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill to have this as an amendment. We lobbied for these changes.
For those who do not know, BaronessNewlove is someone who has huge experience in this area. She was the Victims’ Commissioner. The fact that she is moving the amendment gives us hope. This is also supported, by the way, by the independent Victims’ Commissioner for London, ClaireWaxman.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you. MrMayor, we saw during lockdowns in particular rates of domestic abuse and violence rising. With the current situation with regard to COVID and people not able to socialise as they could have done, what more can you do to ensure that domestic violence survivors get the support they need?

Sadiq Khan: It is worth reminding ourselves - and I know you know this - that during lockdown and also working from home we saw a massive increase in domestic abuse and domestic violence. We realised that the survivor groups and victim groups were struggling. The waiting lists were huge. We invested initially in-year to give these groups support, including for more accommodation.
My worry is that at Christmas domestic abuse and domestic violence goes up as it is, so combined with working from home, combined with people not going out being at home, and the linkage with alcohol at Christmastime, we will see a further increase of domestic abuse and domestic violence. MOPAC is speaking to survivor groups and specialists to see what additional help we can provide within our limited resources.
It is really important, though, that we encourage everyone to come forward if they are the victims of domestic abuse or domestic violence. Do not suffer in silence. Our police are better trained now than they ever have been. We have more women officers. We work closely with survivor groups and specialist groups, including those who work with Londoners for whom English is not their first language and those who do not have recourse to public funds. There is a way out, so please report it.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you.